Except it completely stripped out the elements of storytelling that made the warship vs lighthouse at all entertaining. The original tale ends up being a "David vs Goliath" where the little guy (being a lighthouse) wins and deflates the oversized ego of the ship's commanding officer.

This is... well... possibly the worst re-write I've ever heard. Whoever dreamed it up should stick to their day job.

Not only that, Iran has a quite capable airforce, including two domestically designed and produced fighter aircraft, F-14, Mirage F1, F-4 (which I suspect they have redesignated as attack aircraft), MiG-29, Su-25, Su-27, MiG-25 and a shitload of F-5. I think they have retired their fleet of MiG-21, opting to replace them with domestic aircraft instead of upgrading them to modern standards (something quite a few nations did).

Add to this that many of their pilots (and commanders, people often forget that bit) have plenty of real combat experience from the first gulf war.

I'm sure they could easily muster the force needed to intercept a lone FA-18, and, if need be, destroy it.

Point 1. Challenges are not broadcast on VHF Guard. And 121.5 MHz is not Guard in the sense being used here. 121.5 MHz is international distress, used by emergency beacons and such.

Point 2. You never identify yourself to that degree when initiating a challenge or responding to one. The correct response would of been something along the lines of "United States Aircraft" not specifically "United States Marine Corp F/A-18." When responding to a challenge you identify yourself only in the vaguest terms necessary.

Even on Nimitz Class Aircraft Carriers, which even at many miles simply cannot be mistaken for anything else on the planet, refer to ourselves when responding to challenges only using the generic term "United States Warship."

Now even granting that this story is still someone within the realm of possibility. Iran routinely challenges US Forces in the area, challenges happen almost constantly while we transit the straights of Hormuz for instance. And yes Iran often does take a harsher tone on those challenges until they they learn they are talking to US Forces.

Point 2. You never identify yourself to that degree when initiating a challenge or responding to one. The correct response would of been something along the lines of "United States Aircraft" not specifically "United States Marine Corp F/A-18." When responding to a challenge you identify yourself only in the vaguest terms necessary.

[hijack] Would that be because an enemy of any real capability upon being informed of the exact type of aircraft be better able to select it's attack or defence equipment and tactics based on the known facts about the aircraft, it's performance and so on? Sorry just curious. [/hijack]

[hijack] Would that be because an enemy of any real capability upon being informed of the exact type of aircraft be better able to select it's attack or defence equipment and tactics based on the known facts about the aircraft, it's performance and so on? Sorry just curious. [/hijack]

Pretty much. It's just good tactical mindedness to never volunteer information.

When ever these stories come up with soldiers or marines or whatever giving cocky, smart-alec answers I always imagine them getting back to base, getting hauled in front of the CO and getting yelled at for an hour for blatantly breaking all the rules ( especially in that one where the marine punches the professor ). Would a marine pilot ever dream of saying this? What if they had sent up a couple of interceptors, what would he have done? Shot them down and risked kicking off WWIII?

Would a marine pilot ever dream of saying this? What if they had sent up a couple of interceptors, what would he have done? Shot them down and risked kicking off WWIII?

Marine is capitalized. It's a proper name in this circumstance.

And oh yes, a Marine aviator would most certainly dream of saying this. It's doubtful he'd ACTUALLY say it, but I can promise you that giving a response like this in such a situation is dreamt about nightly.

Hard to say what would happen in this very hypothetical (and almost certainly fictional) scenario if Iran were to send up interceptors. Too many tactical variables.

My understanding is that Iranian interceptors are rather bad, but their air defence is rather good (they import relatively new and rather good systems from Russia, if I remember correctly).

Anyways, as actually being trained to operate those air defence systems (along the lines of National Guard, not at the regular service level), I highly doubt that the Iranian side would actually come from air defence radar. The way things set up there is there are several radars connected to a command post. Essentially, command post tries to keep quiet (if it is stationary, then it is hooked up into all the landline communications, which can be anything, including telegraph lines) and dumps the printouts to the head office. Under certain circumstances the officers at the command post may have the right to engage, but I doubt it is the case here - so, if anything, their job is to track the plane and control the radars on the ground (switch on/off, etc.) and shoot the rockets. All the talking is done through the not-so-secret airforce node, who has the right to send the planes and stuff.

I think that removing this Iranian Air Defence Radar from the equation waters down the story quite a bit.

Actually, I did a time unlimited search and found this webpage has the oldest dated showing of this tale, which is dated 31 Jan 2001 . Prior to then, it doesn't appear to be anywhere on the web. Perhaps someone could contact the owner of the webpage and find out from where they got it.